or “You Might Be An Enemy Combatant If . . .”

This sounds like a bad joke, but it isn’t. The potential political misuse of the arbitrary “enemy combatant” status has been discussed here on many threads albeit usually in the form of using Executive abuse to illustrate that danger while Graham’s cavalier “suggestion” is clearly from the Legislative branch. In comments made by phone to the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin on Friday, April 19, Senator Graham said of the Boston bombers:

‘They were radicalized somewhere, somehow.’ Regardless of whether they are international or ‘homegrown,’ he said, ‘This is Exhibit A of why the homeland is the battlefield.’ Recalling Sen. Rand Paul’s filibuster, Graham noted that he took to the Senate floor specifically to object to Rand’s notion that ‘America is not the battlefield.’ Graham said to me, ‘It’s a battlefield because the terrorists think it is.’ Referring to Boston, he observed, ‘Here is what we’re up against,’ and added, ‘It sure would be nice to have a drone up there [to track the suspect.]’ He also slammed the president’s policy of ‘leading from behind and criminalizing war.’”

That was not the end of Graham’s disturbing posturing.

Continuing his fear mongering rush to throw the Constitution under the bus, Graham took to Twitter.

If captured, I hope Administration will at least consider holding the Boston suspect as enemy combatant for intelligence gathering purposes.

Enhanced interrogation! That’s it. Most sane and ethical people still call that torture. Which is still against Federal law under 18 USC § 2340, § 2340A and § 2340B, and is in direct violation of the Constitution’s 8th Amendment. Ironically enough . . .

The last thing we may want to do is read Boston suspect Miranda Rights telling him to ‘remain silent.’

Do you mean bad decisions like ignoring and violating the Constitution and Federal law, foregoing prosecution of domestic war criminals, and aiding and abetting said war criminals escape justice after the fact, Senator? Or are you talking more “mundane” bad decisions like letting you use the phone or Twitter without a minder to keep you from putting your feet in your mouth? Bad decisions seem to be Washington’s stock and trade in the post-9/11 pre- (some might say “post-“) martial law America.

He was joined in his anti-Constitutional posturing by New York State Senator Greg Ball (R) who twitted when he tweeted on Twitter:

So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn’t use torture on this punk to save more lives?

Senator Graham’s Constitutionally bellicose comments and State Senator Ball’s quite frankly abhorrent and inhumane comments are Exhibit A illustrating the war against your Constitutional rights going on in Washington and in other realms of American politics. This “War on Your Freedoms” (c) ™ is openly being prosecuted by the ever expanding and unitary Executive with the aid of the Legislature. Under the NDAA (the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, specifically § 1021 ), the Obama Administration has maintained the stance that the President has the power to detain and curtail the rights of anyonehe decides is an “enemy combatant” – including U.S. Citizens found within the U.S. like Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, a naturalized American citizen – as enemy combatants. This definition is important because it subjects alleged criminals to the Law of War. This mean they can face sanctions without the benefit of judicial review including indefinite detention without trial or charge, transfer to foreign jurisdictions or entities (a.k.a. extraordinary rendition where they ship you off to a foreign jurisdiction to be tortured), and military tribunals. In essence, the NDAA seeks to designate the United States as an active war zone in regards to allegations of terrorism, or support of terrorism, wherein our most cherished all while putting your basic Constitutional Rights subject to the President’s whim. Herein we see the inherent danger of the expanding police state. Although the Obama Administration insists that it “has a firm and publicly stated policy against using military detention for domestic captures or U.S. citizens. So whatever the (National Defense Authorization Act) may theoretically authorize or tolerate, it doesn’t affect this situation,” as summarized by Benjamin Wittes, senior fellow and research director in public law at the Brookings Institution, we can clearly see that such promises of restraint in using an overreaching Executive power is dependent entirely upon the President in question. The value of political promises made to the general citizenry of the United States is a number rapidly, not just approaching zero, but zooming right on past it into the realm of negative numbers. This blurs the line between criminal law and the Law of War in a manifestly unconstitutional way.

In addition to Graham’s call for a citizen to be stripped of his rights is a concurrent action being taken by the FBI (as backed by both the DOJ and the Obama Administration). They intend to question Tsarnaev without reading him his Miranda rights under the “public safety exception”*. This is somewhat problematic although the “public safety exception” to Miranda is well recognized jurisprudence. The history of Miranda warnings is rooted in the watershed case Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). In Miranda, the Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in interrogation by a defendant in police custody are admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of their 6th Amendment right to consult with an attorney (both before and during questioning) and of their 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination prior to questioning and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them. As often happens with case law, later cases modified Miranda and created the “public safety exception”.

In New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984), the confession took place spontaneously in the course of effecting arrest. Police were apprehending an alleged rapist in a grocery store. The police asked the defendant where his gun was and – before he was Mirandized – he indicated some boxes and said “The gun is over there.” The trial court held that this was inadmissible evidence under Miranda, but the Supreme Court held that “[t]he Fifth Amendment guarantees that ‘[n]o person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.’ In Miranda, this Court for the first time extended the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination to individuals subjected to custodial interrogation by the police. The Fifth Amendment itself does not prohibit all incriminating admissions; ‘[a]bsent some officially coerced self-accusation, the Fifth Amendment privilege is not violated by even the most damning admissions.’

The Miranda Court, however, presumed that interrogation in certain custodial circumstances is inherently coercive, and held that statements made under those circumstances are inadmissible unless the suspect is specifically informed of his Miranda rights and freely decides to forgo those rights. The prophylactic Miranda warnings therefore are ‘not themselves rights protected by the Constitution, but [are] instead measures to insure that the right against compulsory self-incrimination [is] protected.'” Id. at 655, cites omitted, emphasis original.

In other words, the Court focused on voluntariness as the lynchpin of determining if a statement is protected under Miranda. They go further to address the “totality of circumstance” inherent in a situation and create an objective standard for using the exception. “We hold that, on these facts, there is a “public safety” exception to the requirement that Miranda warnings be given before a suspect’s answers may be admitted into evidence, and that the availability of that exception does not depend upon the motivation of the individual officers involved. In a kaleidoscopic situation such as the one confronting these officers, where spontaneity, rather than adherence to a police manual, is necessarily the order of the day, the application of the exception which we recognize today should not be made to depend on post hoc findings at a suppression hearing concerning the subjective motivation of the arresting officer.” Id. at 656-657, emphasis original.

“In recognizing a narrow exception to the Miranda rule in this case, we acknowledge that, to some degree, we lessen the desirable clarity of that rule. At least in part in order to preserve its clarity, we have over the years refused to sanction attempts to expand our Miranda holding. As we have in other contexts, we recognize here the importance of a workable rule ‘to guide police officers, who have only limited time and expertise to reflect on and balance the social and individual interests involved in the specific circumstances they confront.’

But as we have pointed out, we believe that the exception which we recognize today lessens the necessity of that on-the-scene balancing process. The exception will not be difficult for police officers to apply, because, in each case, it will be circumscribed by the exigency which justifies it. We think police officers can and will distinguish almost instinctively between questions necessary to secure their own safety or the safety of the public and questions designed solely to elicit testimonial evidence from a suspect.” Id. at 659-660, cites omitted.

The Quarles decision created a very narrow exception to Miranda that relies upon both circumstance and an immediate danger to either the safety of officers or to public safety. It creates and exception that is neither indefinite in duration nor open-ended in scope. The inherent danger lies in expanding the exception beyond what SCOTUS recognized in Quarles. As noted by Anthony D. Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, “The public safety exception to Miranda should be a narrow and limited one, and it would be wholly inappropriate and unconstitutional to use it to create the case against the suspect. The public safety exception would be meaningless if interrogations are given an open-ended time horizon.”

When view concurrently with the fear mongering of Sen. Graham, this decision to pursue questioning of must be watched with a suspicious eye. In a time of encroaching authoritarianism, his comments must be taken as jaundiced and pro-authoritarian at the least. The actions of the FBI must also be viewed in this light considering this is an American citizen arrested on American soil being stripped of their rights not just in the heat of the moment in a calculation of public safety, but in a post arrest rather direct and open manner.

Is this all in accord with a steady march trampling civil rights and the rule of law to establish a perhaps permanent state of martial law? Does Graham’s ready willingness to abandon the Constitution trouble you? Does the further expansion of the “public safety exception” to Miranda cause you concern?

Who is the real “enemy of the state” as composed of “We the People” and our attendant Constitutional rights? Those who would use terror as a tactic? Or those who would use terror as both an excuse and tool to strip of us of our liberty under the color of authority? Are we sliding into martial law (as also questioned this weekend by fellow guest blogger Mike Spindell)?

Kudos to fellow guest blogger Elaine Magliaro for forwarding the Greg Ball story to me as I wrote this column.

* There are two other exceptions to Miranda, but they are not “true” exceptions – the routine booking question exception and the jail house informant exception – in that they serve more as clarifications as they are consistent with the holding in Miranda where the Quarles public safety exception is a clearly defined departure from the principles and holding of Miranda.

Like this:

103 Responses

This incident could turn out to be the Rubicon moment for our Republic. We, as a nation, are standing at the fork in the road. Which fork will we take? Freedom or tyranny? The choice is ours. There is no gray area. For me the choice is clear: Freedom. Mirandize this young man, and get on with it. Just sayin’.Over and out.

I’m afraid that is more than I have time to read, but I’m glad of the post. These days the ‘Enemies of the State’ are a few dozen Al Qaeda operatives & a few million good, thinking Americans like the writer, myself, many of the commenters in these Blogs, Rand Paul and many others. Of course, I am definining “the State” as what is becoming, rather than what it should be, a servant of the people. For those of us who correctly don’t wish to be compared to Al Qaeda, the huge difference is that WE CARE about the PEOPLE of this country & the world in general. Al Qaeda, terrorists in general, Senator Lindsey Graham, & many top operatives in our government, including our enemy president, DO NOT!

What rights should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev get and why does it matter?
The Obama DOJ says it intends to question the Boston bombing suspect “extensively” without first Mirandizing him

critical intrinsic points:
“But there’s another reason why I found Democratic outrage over Graham’s statements to be confounding. The theory on which Graham’s arguments are based is one that the Obama administration has vigorously embraced with the full-throated endorsement of most of its supporters: namely, that the US is “at war”, and that anyone who takes up arms against the country or tries to kill Americans is not entitled to basic rights – even if they’re American citizens. As Graham told the Washington Post, his view that Tsarnaev is not entitled to these rights is grounded in his belief that the US is fighting a global war and those who fight in it against the US are “enemy combatants”.
It is bizarre indeed to watch Democrats act as though Graham’s theories are exotic or repellent. This is, after all, the same faction that insists that Obama has the power to target even US citizens for execution without charges, lawyers, or any due process, on the ground that anyone the president accuses of Terrorism forfeits those rights. The only way one can believe this is by embracing the same theory that Lindsey Graham is espousing: namely, that accused Terrorists are enemy combatants, not criminals, and thus entitled to no due process and other guarantees in the Bill of Rights. Once you adopt this “entire-globe-is-a-battlefield” war paradigm – as supporters of Obama’s assassination powers must do and have explicitly done – then it’s impossible to scorn Graham’s views about what should be done with Tsarnaev. Indeed, one is necessarily endorsing the theory in which Graham’s beliefs are grounded.”

In short Greenwald is implying that the entire mindset; the entire perpetual war paradigm is hypocritical and corrupted rationally. His point is that the Democrats are either so jaded they have lost all perspective, or they are ultimately as culpable as Graham…albeit less obviously so!

Ever notice how Lindsey Graham Cracker always hyper excites the southern drawl when on TV. The only other one who does this so grandly is that jewish guy from VA who wants you to think that he thinks just like a Southern Boy and that is Eric Kantor.

“In 2003, Ball was nominated as “Military Volunteer of the Year” for the 11th Wing. He was awarded an achievement medal for outstanding service by General John P. Jumper and was honorably discharged from active duty in January 2005, with the rank of Captain without ever serving in harm’s way. Ball remains in the U.S. Air Force Ready Reserve.”

To even have the concept of a battle field is a satanic consent strait from the mind of Satan. it gives the illusion that a battle solves a problem. A battle never solves a problem. The lack of a battle is problem solved. The enemy of the state is blissful peace that only Jesus is us can give. That peace looks on a weapon as a soul harming thing. The consent of a state give the appearance of us and them. The devil likes that. That creates a tug and pull between states with one contesting the other to begin a war that both sides feel justified in fighting. The bloody battle starts. Ghent it ends there is remorse. Time passes having the process repeats its self over and over again. That is because there is division of us and them. The perfect ingredients for war. The state is their own worst enemy. The state believe it or not is by third actions s religious as a religions pastor teaching people to war against gays, zoosexuals or teaching people that the nude body is bad influencing laws by not saying to the people that make the law excuse me but God does not teach that nakedness is bad because he made all things nude. Religious person will not do that allowing opp4ressive state laws to continue on and on as time passes. The state does not have Jesus in it hence is its own worse enemy.

As regards the Boston Marathon suspects, will we be permitted to know if either of them, but particularly the alive 19 year old, were on psychiatric drugs? If this is the case & such facts are aired, this could go against the inside enemy plans (read Obama & Co, the Co being neither party in particular). It is highly likely in the case of the younger brother. Nothing else could so help bring on such a dramatic change in character & morality.

I agree with Darren, that the idea of using the public safety exception to Miranda to interrogate this citizen is both abhorrent and unnecessary. If we allow these real enemies of the state to take away our rights, the bombers and al-Qaeda have already won.

I thought that the comment I made above was on Jonathan’s blog, but it was yours. It works anyway because I think between Jonathan’s opening blog, my followup rant done before reading his and this excellent nailing of the usual unsavory suspects, we have added perspective drowned out by the media in
their Boston coverage. Bob did an excellent rant on my post that he only briefly refers to here. I think it bears repeating in the context you’ve established here:

“Thank you Mike for the much needed bullshit repellent regarding this Boston Marathon thing.

I’m not only sick, but angry at the media and government continually milking this for personal gain.

How is the Boston bombing more tragic than the disaster in West Texas? What does the American flag have to do with capturing a criminal deviant? Why is it that the federal government is always the first to spout tripe like “we will not let the terrorists win.” Win what? The only people taking away our freedoms are the people in the Fed who leverage the fear created by acts and threats of terrorism to their advantage. John McCain and Lindsay Graham are actually calling for treating the suspect as an enemy combatant. WTF??

Where is this great psychological trauma that the media and federal government keeps talking about? How is it worse than what’s happening in West Texas?

I’m so sick of the pissing and the moaning amplified and exaggerated by those who have the most to gain; the media selling it and the folks in government leveraging it for unconstitutional purposes.

This is how you build a nation full of chicken shit pansies willing to give up their rights in alleged defense against irrational fear.”

Excerpt:
Republican Senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina went a step further, suggesting Dzhokhar be treated as an enemy combatant like a soldier captured in war. The move drew the ire of longtime McCain aide and speechwriter Mark Salter.

“My friend, Lindsey Graham, is wrong on this,” Salter posted on his Facebook page. “However unforgivable his crimes, he’s a US citizen, arrested on US soil, with, at this time, no known associations with foreign terrorist organizations at war with the U.S. To declare him an “enemy combatant,” and deny him his rights is un-American.”

These are all good christian politicians I’m sure
I learned about Mithras on the Turley blog several months ago.
It was noted that Constantine may have cleverly and gradually morphed mithras into the new christian flag and faith of his soldiers.

I wonder if what goes around comes around.

Could the current government and CMIC (corporate military etc)
be turning flag and Christianity back to Mithrasism ?

The one thing we should all remember about this is that it was always a police action. There was no need for Patriot Acts, or for warrantless wiretapping, or for “enhanced interrogation techniques,” or for anything else out that bag of horrors the previous administration filled so fatly after the attacks of 9/11. The waterboard was left in the closet. This was cops being cops, albeit with some fairly impressive modern-day technology. (I didn’t know police helicopters had thermal-imaging capabilities. I will now respect more those signs in New Hampshire that say, “Speed Monitored by Aircraft.”) There has been grinding forensic work ever since the bombs went off. There was all that basic shoe-leather detective work yesterday, house after house, block after block. And that’s not even to get into the horrific events of Thursday night, which nonetheless did not require a military response. Just cops being cops.

And now there should be a trial. And not just a trial, but the greatest, fairest trial in the history of trials. The defendant should get the best possible legal assistance money can buy. The “public safety exception” to Miranda should be allowed to expire. He should get the best jury we can empanel and, if we have to move the trial to Guam on account of pre-trial publicity, then godspeed. And then he should be tried and, if convicted, in the greatest, fairest trial in history, he should get shipped off forever to federal prison, never to be heard from again. We should ignore all the predictable howling from John McCain, and from his maiden aunt, Lindsey Graham. This guy is accused of being a multiple murderer. He committed his crimes against the people of Suffolk and Middlesex Counties in Massachusetts. These were not acts of war. They were crimes, more garish than most. This was a day for cops, not for grandstanding celebrity politicians who were not here this week.

If you believe in America, the real American, the one promised in the Constitution then you really have no choice. Read him his rights, get him a good attorney and make the state prove its case. If you are a scare little chicken-sh1t like Linseed here then you would rather wet yourself p1ssing on the Constitution and American ideals.

I believe in America. I believe in the Constitution. Despite its flaws it is still the best hope we have for a free and fair nation. I am not afraid to live under the rule of law. If this guy can be denied those rights anyone can be denied.

This would be comical if it were not so serious. At first, I thought it likely the bombers were pros, because of the directional blast and use of shrapnel. The pressure cooker bombs worked almost exactly like a Claymore mine, and cut the legs out from under people for about the same range as a Claymore.

However, when my son called me to tell me photos of the suspects had been released, I knew then they were not pros. For one to have his face uncovered and not wearing large sunglasses, baseball cap on backward, gave him away. The other one did have on shades and his ball cap partly covering his face; however, the fact they were together showed this was not a professional operation. If they did not make any effort at disguise, and had to know they would be on hundreds of cameras, that tells me a lot about them.

As for the bomb’s relative sophistication, there are lots of instructions on the Internet on how to build almost anything you want, including a bomb. The bombers were not exactly Beavis and Butthead, but they were dangerous. even if they were sent by some nefarious foreign operation, If they were this dumb, their handlers would have known these guys were just mules, and would not have given them any information useful as actionable intelligence.

Given the fact we now know they are not professionals, there is no reason to treat them as if they are anything more than they are. Murderous crooks and vandals with a homemade bomb. If the justice system worked on the Ted Kaczynski, George Metesky, Timothy McVeigh, Richard Reid and J. B. Stoner cases, how come we need unconstitutional processes in these cases?

Otteray Scribe: They never believed they would be identified and thought they would remain completely unknown. No exit plans, no escape from the area intended. Something just doesn’t make sense, discovery will be lost if that kid dies.

God that is a stupid statement. Up there with “crime doesn’t pay.” I guess that War of Independence didn’t do anything for us; I guess that Revolutionary War did nothing to end slavery, I guess that French Revolution didn’t do a damn thing.

Fear mongering punks like Lindsay Graham cultivating a nation of weaklings too fearful to be trusted with freedom or privacy. Not the America I want to live in.
Some friends of this blog have recently commented in support of actually inviting more surveillance under the usual misguided notion that they will somehow be made safe as long as they are perpetually under the gaze of the uninvited eye of Big Brother. We won’t! The contention that once you leave the sanctuary of your hovel and enter the public spaces means that you have no reasonable expectation to not be tracked and monitored 24/7 does offend the First Amendment right to freedom of association. Unless of course you think it is the governments business knowing everything you do, when and with whom you do it. Goes right along with the the government knowing what my reading preferences at the library are. I can feel a chill just thinking about it.

Winston Smith had that one little corner in his apartment where he thought he was unobserved by the telescreen. I don’t want to live like Winston. I’m going to go have a “Victory Gin” martini and see if that makes me feel any better about the prospects that we don’t cede more freedom and privacy to the Authoritarians as collateral fallout from Boston.

“In the end he had won the battle over himself, he loved Big Brother”. Man that guy was prescient.

Bruce E. Woych sez: “They never believed they would be identified and thought they would remain completely unknown. No exit plans, no escape from the area intended.”

**********************************************
My point exactly. These are amateurs. I would need to go over the whole file of their life history to do a real profile, but I already have a pretty good idea of how their minds worked on at least a few dimensions.

No anticipatory anxiety,
no empathy,
no guilt or remorse,
no escape plan,
no attempt at disguise,
never allowed for the fact there would be cameras everywhere,
amoral.

Professionals would have approached this in a methodical, well planned manner. Not these guys. They were so incompetent they were caught within hours, not weeks or months. Or never.

‘1984’ quotes are good & Orwell was indeed prescient or just very good at extrapolating current BS into future BS, but you should say what you are quoting from as that guy also wrote a very boring book that few have read cover to cover.

Failing to give Miranda rights to schmucko only means that statements given by the guy can not be used in court against him. Against him. Those statements can lead to arrests of others. There is enough evidence to convict schmucko without introducing his own statements into evidence. That does not mean that they can waterboard him or otherwise torure him to learn more facts. The Carmen Miranda Rule is one that gets overstated, unduly criticised and glamourized.

Last I heard yesterday the White House was saying he would (in all likelihood) get a civil trial and the ‘exigent circumstance’ exception would be applied. Later in the evening a security guy (ex FBI or the like) on one of the TV specials was saying that the exception had about a 24 hour life span.

I’d call Lindsey Graham a Neanderthal except I have too much respect and affection for our cousins the Neanderthals.

Because those names sound ‘American’ and they didn’t post about Muslim issues. Graham is one of those good Christians that see this act in the larger context of a good old-fashioned crusade. Even if the actions were motivated in total by some twisted, religion based motivation the suspect/perp is still a citizen and should be treated like one. They don’t treat bombers, vandals and doctor killers at women’s health clinics as enemy combatants though they are motivated entirely by their religion. Graham doesn’t see it that way, he’s a crusader, and a bigot. IMO.

Tony C, at first I couldn’t tell if you were being sarcastic on your response to Artiewhitefox since you are right about only two of those 5 statements. Crime doesn’t pay in the long run, battles rarely solve anything, & the French were no better off with their dreadful revolution, getting themselves a Stalin called Napolean.

Good article Gene….. I believe that if he’s tried he should be tried in federal court in Boston…. The PSE…. I’m not so sure I’m in favor of it…. As I see it…. These guys had no plan of escape…. But it’s interesting that American…. Which flys lot out of Logan was shut down…. There are lots of questions I have….

We could be making too much of a fuss about the Miranda statement. I don’t trust Public Radio very far but what I just heard sounded okay. He has the Miranda rights anyway & could ask for a lawyer & clam up, but asking questions before making that statement could give good inteligence on others’ participation etc. so why encourage him to shut up? If that makes his own guilt harder to prosecute, okay, but there is so much on film & witnessed, while the heavier participant already has his capital punishment. Its odd how they go on about capital punishment being the worst. At 19, true life in prison is far far harsher.

Then legal system condemns. Jesus in us does not condemn. Therefore for people to condemn do not have Jesus in them. That also means people had better not kill because they would be condemning themselves to see what hell really is and that is Gods displeased face. God is doing his best to draw all unto him. Those that refuse infinite love will be the loser having an incinerated soul in Gods glory that will be gone forever.

You don’t see Satan looking like an angel of light being evil. Satan is the accuser of the brteteren. Do bad to whoever do bad to Jesus at the same time. There is no separation. Evil; gets what evil gives. God is also seeing the results of the Babylonian empire. People that war and arrest will have a similar end having them not repent. The lie about hell made human war. Gods Glory is a devouring fire to evil. The soul that sins it shall die. Through all of those wars Satan was escorting people into his unseen jail two by two like the animals into Noah’s boat.

It is virtually imposable to have freedom in a nation that endorses bondage in jails. That is Satan’s way not the Loving Lords way, We have been deceived by words in a song and printed letters on a bill having us think we have what we don’t have a lick of.

It is virtually imposable to have freedom in a nation that endorses bondage in jails. That is Satan’s way not the Loving Lords way. We have been deceived by words in a song and printed letters on a bill having us think we have what we don’t have a lick of.

Okay, I’ve been a bit scattered with various projects this afternoon, but I wanted to address a few of the comments now that things are quieting down here.

Bob Esq.,

Thanks and that was a most excellent and appropriate rant that Mike S. re-posted to this thread. Bill Hicks would have been proud of you. I’m with you on the fed up and angry at the media thing. In fact, I hadn’t planned on doing a column today (I was planning on tomorrow) until I got up this morning and read the garbage coming out of what I can only presume is Graham’s mouth. However, if it turned out to be another orifice I would not be shocked.
*************
Bruce E. Woych,

Thanks for the appropriate cross-post.
*************
ap,

You’re welcome and thanks for the additional info on Ball.
*************
Mike S.,

I know you’re not a fan of Jung, but synchronicity can be a wonderful thing. :mrgreen: You’d almost think we’re concerned about the Constitution around here or something! Thanks for cross-posting Bob’s rant.
*************
Elaine,

Thanks for the additional links, but especially the Pierce link. I’m really starting to take a shine to that guy’s writing.
**************
Frankly sez:

“If you believe in America, the real American, the one promised in the Constitution then you really have no choice. Read him his rights, get him a good attorney and make the state prove its case. If you are a scare little chicken-sh1t like Linseed here then you would rather wet yourself p1ssing on the Constitution and American ideals.

I believe in America. I believe in the Constitution. Despite its flaws it is still the best hope we have for a free and fair nation. I am not afraid to live under the rule of law. If this guy can be denied those rights anyone can be denied.”

To which I respond “Hell yeah!”
**************
OS,

Yep. This wasn’t “Mission Impossible” on their part. More like “Mission Improbable”. Not a professional bone in either body is my suspicion.
**************
LK,

Well Graham did replace Strom Thurmond. A certain amount of bigotry and racism is expected when filling ol’ Strom’s shoes.
**************
AY,

Thanks and I have seven completely off topic words for you: Blue Bell Creole Cream Cheese Ice Cream. As an ice cream aficionado, you needed the heads up on that.

And a thank you to you all (including the unnamed) for adding to the discussion. Except you, Artie. Really man. Get some help.

This is not about making “too much fuss about the Miranda statement.” The “fuss,” as you call it, is over preservation of the Constitution. The latest nonsense from the lips of Lindsey Graham is symptomatic of a much larger problem.

It seems trying the defendant in this terrorist act, as he is a US citizen within the territory of the US, would violate the posse comitatus law and the Insurrection Act because it would be equivalent to the military enforcing the law against a civilian.

We are not in a declared war, and the civil authority was not incapable of maintaining order as is required by the amended Insurrection Act. The state authority to muster the local militia or national guard was not to my knowledge declared by the governor as being part of a martial law declaration, but did assist. Nevertheless the federal permissability of the military tribunal would not be triggered.

In my view to make the issue more acceptable to the Supreme Court decision allowing this would be only to ask questions relating to clear and present dangers, such as any booby traps, other bombs, loose material, and other persons planning the attacks.

After that phase has been completed then standard Miranda procedure should be followed.

Personally, I don’t think the evidence gathered in the Public Safety exception should be used in trial but can be used to establish probable cause to arrest, but should be admissable in any subsequent action against other actors as far as chain of evidence is concerned. It may be admissable per the court decisions but I think excluding it from trial might be a more prudent approach.

I also believe there will be more than enough evidencde to be presented in trial to make it work even if he clammed up.

The worst sort of coward is not the man who runs from the battlefield, but the man who runs from liberty. The former feels shame and remorse for his actions; the latter attempts to justify them. Lindsey Graham personifies moral cowardice. Thank you, Gene H., for calling him out.

The accusation that we are criminalizing war is both absurd and subversive. The real threat comes from our insistence on militarizing crime. We glorify criminals when we treat random violence as the actions of warriors.

I may not be a Jungian, but I ‘m an aged hippie aka “The Old Tripper “. This was synchronicity. This morning I woke up with another article written and decided to write because I also was angry. After I posted the two blogs I saw Jonathan’s and then saw your dibs E Mail. I think this is all quite cool in that it represents what Jonathan’s blog is all about.

Well, after “decimating” Terror in Iraq.
While “annihilation” of terrorists in the barren mounts of Afgan is almost “accomplished,” we need new pastures for activities edifying our freedom and security.

Did you notice the brand new military-style armoured vehicles sprouting in Boston? Were they ordered and built to quell demonstrations? to quiet ‘instigations?’

These are all good christian politicians I’m sure
I learned about Mithras on the Turley blog several months ago.
It was noted that Constantine may have cleverly and gradually morphed mithras into the new christian flag and faith of his soldiers.

I wonder if what goes around comes around.

Could the current government and CMIC (corporate military etc)
be turning flag and Christianity back to Mithrasism ?============================================Gene H has isolated some of the essences of that dynamic in this post of his.

But let me set the background to my response to your comment.

The U.S. government has forever infiltrated groups it sees as a threat to policy (and more so now than at any time, if you consider NSA spying on Americans to fit into that slot).

They gloss over that meddling involvement by saying that they infiltrate groups that “are a threat to the public.”

That is at once obvious bull, if we note the recent post by Mike S and a comment made up-thread:

“Thank you Mike for the much needed bullshit repellent regarding this Boston Marathon thing.

I’m not only sick, but angry at the media and government continually milking this for personal gain.

How is the Boston bombing more tragic than the disaster in West Texas?

In other words, did the press go into Hollywood Drama Queen Series Mode when a greater danger to the public was happening in Texas?

Mike S was quoting Bob, who did a rant on Mike’s recent post.

A rant that was saying “why focus on a minor threat to the public, when there are dynamics ongoing that are orders of magnitude greater than this Boston Marathon case?

He was, among other things, focusing on lax regulation of very dangerous industries which Oil-Qaeda is constructed of.

And in essence he was also pointing out that Oil-Qaeda is a greater threat than two guys with pressure cookers and gunpowder (Gulf oil spill, addiction to finite resources, warmongering empire-ism, dangerous nuclear sites and bombs, The Sixth Mass Extinction, man made destruction of The Climate Cycle, etc.).

Yet, these greater dangers get 1 second of coverage compared to the drama queen 24/7 focus on this case by Qil-Qaeda’s mouth pieces.

Why did you, Mr. David Blauw, and why did I, Dredd, have to learn about the morphed clone of the religion of the Roman Empire Warmongers from places other than our news and information media?

It is because “Martial Law”, the subject of Mike S‘s post, and “Who or what is the real threat”, the subject of Gene H‘s post, expose greater enemies than the ones we are informed of in the incompetent and deranged drama queen media.

That is very serious, and it is worthy of our concern.

If they are trying to ruin the American tradition of justice that evolved in modern times … a tradition informed by our ancestors in the crucible of oppression and tyranny … then to replace it with authoritarian tyranny, we must resist.

Especially when it has been done by the genetic descendants infected still with toxins (Mithras or Mythra) that ride the streams of power, corrupting minds who think power is nothing to worry about.

For America to fall, sickened with tyranny, would be a tragedy forever.

And so we all continue to build anti-bodies: more clear thought … better emotions … better intellectual dynamics, better analysis, and the Constitutional laws that are under attack.

Also, like the microbes, we must keep in touch with each other and preserve and protect the Internet.

The microbes keep in touch with molecular “words”, we do it with the language of reason coming from most of us, not the few.

Our analysis does not originate from some propaganda central., but emanates from the hearts of all of us who want to preserve America in peace.

We are not the first cowboys to carnival in this type of bull rodeo, riding a “mad bull that has lost its way” (Stones – Gimme Shelter):

There is a kind who is pure in his own eyes,
Yet is not washed from his filthiness.

There is a kind — oh how lofty are his eyes!
And his eyelids are raised in arrogance.

There is a kind of man whose teeth are like swords
And his jaw teeth like knives,

To devour the afflicted from the earth
And the needy from among men.

(Proverbs). Lindsay’s madness has been around as long as the toxins that cause his disorder.

Going on with the proverb:

Four things are small on the earth,
But they are exceedingly wise:

The ants are not a strong people,
But they prepare their food in the summer;

The shephanim are not mighty people,
Yet they make their houses in the rocks;

The locusts have no king,
Yet all of them go out in ranks;

The lizard you may grasp with the hands,
Yet it is in kings’ palaces.

The bully religion (Mithraism) in all its variety, depending on the culture being infected, is a sickness on our society and a deadly threat.

But in this winter we prepare for summer, in this weakness we build our stronghold in the rocks of a free people’s ideology, we have no king because freedom whispers the way in all our ears, so that we proceed in that direction naturally, and we have people like us in the kings palaces whom the king is unaware of.

We have infiltrated the kings palaces.

Be patient, resist, and continue to criticize the fools in government while we love and appreciate those in government who are not fools.

They are working for us all, but most likely we do not know their names, we only know their spirit.

Lindsey Graham’s opinion is that the suspect be held as an enemy combatant

Obama’s opinion is that the man can be “legally” murdered without trial

The man is a US citizen and should be given the rights of a US citizen. While his alleged actions were acts of terrorism they were not acts of war. As such he should be treated like a criminal suspect.

Who are the enemies of the people? Forget enemies of the state for a moment. Some adages can help at this stage of our history.

Dont trust anyone under 30.

Caps backwards means crap in underwear.

Any Fundamentalist is mentally stuck on first base.

Send Stan back to his Stan. But not Stan The Man or Stanley Tools.

Carmen Miranda warned you once– think twice.

Kill your brother in the commission of crime and guess what, you do the time.

Mirror mirror on the wall, prison cell or bathroom stall, whose the fruitcase looking back, must be Ivan doin smack.

— nuff of those

This dog thinks that the opCays gotta get a good dog and follow his nose to the nearest neighborhood mosque. Five will get ya ten that there is one near the two Schmucko Brothers’ abode. Getta a warrant and go inside. Put the Koran aside and look for emails and examine the trash. Punks like these two Muslim Brothers have mentors. The Muslim Brotherhood is like a dogpac only it is garnered together by wishful thinking and hate rather than dog bisucits and story telling. So follow the Muslims to their pac and find the others doing that religious smack. There you will find the enemas of the people.

HumpinDog: Your language sometimes does not get typed right on this Dogalogue Machine. It is Enemies of the State. Not enemas of the people. The latter has to do with “of the people by the people”. Enemies of the state are found at the local Muslim Brotherhood Mosque. Lets ask our dogs in Boston to get the terriers together and sniff them out. These two brothers may be two peas in a pod but there are more pods of peas in that town to be questioned.
I like the idea of charging Marathon Bomber with the felony murder of his own brother. It gives a new dimension to the Muslim Brotherhood. Also watch the airports and train stations because what plays in Boston dont stay in Boston. It ain’t Vegas. Five will get ya ten that these Tsar Boys had delusions of grandeure. One is already in the promised land. Question the peddle to the metal guy before he croaks.

“The accusation that we are criminalizing war is both absurd and subversive. The real threat comes from our insistence on militarizing crime. We glorify criminals when we treat random violence as the actions of warriors.”

Might I quote this in the future?

Something that hasn’t been discussed yet is will this “inspire” others to act in a similar manner? These guys went out in a blaze of glory, almost.

The Kabuki Theater (that I thankfully missed) is surely imprinted in the minds of the masses, especially those that may not be of sound mind or body.

Will I need to register my 22 quart pressure cooker now? Must I provide a “need” to own one too?

ON a side note, this past Wednesday, on my way into work at the Buffalo Airport, they had a “Police” Checkpoint, I was ordered along with a few others into a “holding lot” whereby I was ordered to turn off my car, put it in park and they proceeded to search my vehicle. The “officer” (NFTA Employee) saw my name tag for the Rental Car Company I work for and said, “You work here?” I replied that I did, he then said I was “free to go”.

I was not under arrest, I was not suspected of committing a crime, I was not “free to go” until they decided I was not guilty of anything. Add to that one of my coworkers that came in an hour after me said the “checkpoint” was gone. I guess they don’t work after 5pm.

Orwell nailed it and your statement expresses it perfectly.

“…we treat random violence as the actions of warriors.” We’re all guilty of being warriors until we can prove we are not.

What kind of parents who live in the south would ever name their male kid “Lindsey”? It dont fit with “I’m a cracker, you’re one too, gonna take good care of you.” And where does he come up with that dumb grin all the time? He looks like some character off of Saturday Night Live back in the days 30 years ago when they wanted to bomb Iran.

So if they charge the Tsar Boy with felony murder for running over his now dead brother with the stolen car will it make him have a tougher time when he gets to Heaven? Will big bro be mad from getting run over and perhaps raise objectins to his getting admitted? Is it true that first bro in has the right to nix the admittance to heaven of an errant brother. Is that not a major tenet of the Muslim Brotherhood Tenthead Doctrine? . And where can I find on-line the published vershion of the Muslim Brotherhood Tenthead Doctrine? Was thieri Marathon Bombing sort of a rite of passage to get them admitted to the Muslim Brotherhood, or where they already members?

If Crime doesn’t pay, then why do criminals consistently engage in it? They engage in it rationally, not as outbursts of uncontrolled emotion. They see something they want and they steal it. What rational person would steal if they thought it would cost them?

If Crime doesn’t pay, why do those burglarized, mugged, defrauded out of their property and retirement funds remain destitute? Where did the money, the jewelry, the cars and entertainment systems all end up? All of that was valuable, all of that was taken from them, and certainly the value went elsewhere, it didn’t just vanish.

Bernie Madoff stole billions, methodically, for decades. You can claim all you want that his crime didn’t pay “in the long run,” but do you really think spending his last ten years in jail balances out the thirty years he spent living like a billionaire? I certainly see that as a rational choice on Bernie’s part. He remains without empathy for the harm he caused; he says, “Phuck my victims.”

As for battles, I suggest you read more history. I will agree that individual battles may not be decisive in solving problems, but a series of battles, even a series of wars, do indeed solve problems. The French have what they demanded in the French revolution, equality and a democracy. Our revolution resulted in a democracy replacing what the founders believed was tyrannical rule. Our revolutionary war was the cornerstone of eliminating slavery in this country; and the more abstract “battles” of the civil rights movement (some of which still involved bloodshed) have solved much of the remaining problem of institutionalized inequality and racism.

If you prefer, we can look at it logically instead of empirically. Battles are fought by two sides in conflict over an issue; presumably one they could not solve any other way, such as by negotiation or compromise, bribery or threats, strikes or protests or appeals to third party pressures or diplomacy.

Battles are a last resort: Either drop your demands and take your losses before the battle begins (a 100% chance of defeat, with 0% losses for your opponent) or take your chances in battle (even if that is still a 100% chance of defeat, it is unlikely to be a 0% loss for your opponent).

But battles usually do have victors, wars usually do have victors, and the winning party has their “problem” solved. At a cost, to be sure, but solved. If your problem is tyrannical rule by a King, winning the war means winning at least a final key battle, and winning the war solves the problem at hand, freeing one’s self from the chains of the King.

If your problem is a foreign dictator that wants to literally rule the world (say, WWII for an empirical example), it is battle that solves the problem at hand and defeats those ambitions.

It is naive to claim that crime does not pay, of course it does, but it isn’t fair, it is oppressive, and that is why the non-sociopaths among us have chosen to oppose it with battle when necessary; that is why our police are armed and shielded like warriors.

It is naive to claim that battle doesn’t solve anything, of course it does. Violence is usually not the right choice, but there is such a thing as righteous violence preventing predation and oppression (both physical and financial) that we know is wrong. Battles forcibly take what could not be taken by any other means, and sometimes what must be taken by force is freedom, justice, a homeland, the fruits of your own labor or just a future without oppression for the group of people you love. That applies on the tiny scale as well as the massive scale. A cop may battle to save a single victim, a marine may do battle to save his friend. A country may do battle to prevent being invaded and sacked, a race or religious group of people may do battle to prevent being enslaved or wiped out.

Why don’t we end this silly debate with one word, crime “can” pay. It can pay VERY WELL. However, the downside is big, being prison or death. People like Pablo Escobar, Carlos Lehder, Whitey Bulger, etc. have experienced both the reward and risk. Pablo Escobar was one of wealthiest people in the world. He died on an apartment rooftop in Medellin. However, seeing the folks engaged in this semantic debate, I doubt there will any agreement.

None of this is to say that Tsarnaev can’t simply invoke his right to counsel and right to remain silent even before he receives his Miranda warning. A Miranda warning does not create either of those rights — it is meant to inform the uninformed of the preexisting rights. If after living here for ten years, he does not know of those rights, he really has failed to pay attention (which is certainly a possibility). The interrogators can seek information under the exception, but he doesn’t have to give it.

Of course, at this point, he is probably under sedation and unable to think clearly, if at all. That leads to a different question regarding admissibility, I think, of any statements he makes.

I would also think that someone would already have tried, on behalf of the family, to retain counsel for him. There are no doubt plenty of willing defense attorneys — this is a high profile case that will lead to publicity for counsel.

What happens if retained counsel marches into the hospital and demands to see his client?

Yep, pretty creepy though not unusual. I saw an interview with the sister of the woman who wrote the piece you referenced and in that interview she said that she, her sister (the writer), and their mother started using this woman for facials when she worked at a spa. When she was fired from the spa, she called them and told them they could continue to come to her for facials at her apartment. Sounds like she ran a facility out of her apartment and thus kept some of her patrons after she was fired.

Lots of people run such small businesses like this out of their homes … under the radar so to speak.

My comment to Gene H, just up-thread, quotes from the video linked at the end of it, which was a video of an interview of:

“Ted Gunderson was born in Colorado Springs. He graduated from the University of Nebraska in 1950. Gunderson joined the Federal Bureau of Investigation in December 1951 under J. Edgar Hoover. He served in the Mobile, Knoxville, New York City, and Albuquerque offices. He held posts as an Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge in New Haven and Philadelphia. In 1973 he became the head of the Memphis FBI and then the head of the Dallas FBI in 1975. Ted Gunderson was appointed the head of the Los Angeles FBI in 1977. In 1979 he was one of a handful interviewed for the job of FBI director …”

America isn’t any kind of battlefield. We’re not seeing anything remotely similar to what has gone on in Israel or Northern Ireland.

For all the rhetoric these sociopaths in office constantly spew about terrorism, nobody anywhere ever points out that all the really damaging attack vectors are not only difficult to defend against, but moreover, don’t seem to be a problem.

If there were terrorists that wanted to disrupt the American way of life, they could drive cross country bombing the high tension power lines that we depend on, and never get caught…. but they don’t. Or, if there were terrorists that wanted to inflict mass causalities, they could go on a jihadi shooting spree, since guns are legal and abundant…. but they don’t. Or, if they wanted to capitalize on the airplane as the new symbol of terror, they could sit in a parked car by an airport and take potshots at planes taking off with a high powered rifle…. but they don’t.

I could go on, but I won’t. This war on terror is just an excuse to continue the subsidy system put in place during the Cold War. The continuation of the Cold War mood of paranoia is just a means to an end.

A new space race would be an equally effective mechanism to ensure the high tech industry keeps its subsidies… but there are decades of antagonistic dogmas the powerful would have to first unlearn.

I’d agree with you if we can accept the assumption that organized industry remains a part of our species. Archaeologically speaking, however, the last time human civilization was sustainable was probably pre-industrial. Individuals also probably had greater autonomy under the European feudal system.

There are actually a few non-trivial problems associated with space exploration. There’s an excellent academic paper that discusses them here:

I would consider a new space race to be the “lesser of two evils,” compared to what is required by a permanent war economy. Which is to say, I’d rather have less technology, but if it’s going to stick around, I’d rather it not be destructive.

I haven’t real all the comments so sorry if I am being repetitive but even today, Sunday, they are talking still of “enemy combatant” and the imminent threat” fallacy to say no Miranda.
I am going to be very interested in reading what the senators and people say about a federal public defender for him. Our tax dollars, defending this already found guilty guy, by Fox, and some senators, and too many of the public (and media)

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Interrogation: Bombing Suspect Won’t Get Miranda Rights, Will Face Elite Investigators
Allegedly had a ton of other explosives. Since the one is dead and the other in the hospital still don’t know how it can be considered an “imminent threat”

Very interesting article linked below. The current President of Chechnya, Kadyrov, is an ex-rebel fighter against Russia that became an ally and supporter of Putin. A video linked on social media by one of the Tsarnaev brothers, is unfavorable regarding Kadyrov. The Russian influence of the Chechen government with Kadyrov is causing internal problems. Considering that the Tsarnaev brothers spent time recently in Chechnya I’d like to see the Chechen connection explored more fully.

….”And yet the ripple effects of the Chechen wars eventually played out in 2004 in the Arab emirate of Qatar, where Russian agents assassinated an exiled Chechen leader with a car bomb, and on the streets of Vienna in 2009 when Chechens gunned down a fellow Chechen who had broken from the Kremlin-supported leadership in the republic to file a complaint in the European Court of Human Rights. The complaint detailed torture by the Russian-backed security services, and the republic’s current president, Ramzan A. Kadyrov.

Just a week ago, the United States put Mr. Kadyrov, a former rebel turned ally of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and the primary subject of the torture complaint, on a secret list of Russian citizens banned from the United States for human rights abuses, according to people briefed on the list.

Curiously, the most political of the video clips posted on social media by one of the Tsarnaev brothers was not aimed at the West, but at Mr. Kadyrov, who is loathed by many Chechens and regarded as a vicious Kremlin stooge.

Mr. Kadyrov on Friday dismissed the Tsarnaev brothers and any ties between the Boston bombing and Chechnya. “The roots of this evil are to be found in America,” he said in a post on Instagram.”….

woody voinche:
Serious perspectives; deeply troubling history and credible sources (the open link to the guardian article for Sept. 2004 is a telling context, and the more recent guardian article is worth a serious consideration as well). It’s a “hate to believe it” scenario and the facts of engagements are disturbing in themselves. Once again we can repeat
JONATHAN TURLEY”s credo, Res ipsa loquitur (“The thing itself speaks”).
to accommodate access to the other articles:

Chechnya and the Boston bombing: link, if established, would be unprecedented
If Chechens perpetrated attack, it would be first outside Russia by militants from former Soviet republic (read @ link)
Luke Harding : The Guardian, Friday 19 April 2013 12.58 EDT

SATURDAY, APR 20, 2013 02:20 PM PDT
How Boston exposes America’s dark post-9/11 bargain
Why did this story drive the whole country nuts? Because we traded rights for “security,” and didn’t get either
BY ANDREW O’HEHIR

woody voinche:
Serious perspectives; deeply troubling history and credible sources (the open link to the guardian article for Sept. 2004 is a telling context, and the more recent guardian article is worth a serious consideration as well). It’s a “hate to believe it” scenario and the facts of engagements are disturbing in themselves. Once again we can repeat
JONATHAN TURLEY”s credo, Res ipsa loquitur (“The thing itself speaks”).

(inadvertantly I ended up with more than two links on the previous posting and it went to “moderation” so this posting is a correction)

Chechnya and the Boston bombing: link, if established, would be unprecedented
If Chechens perpetrated attack, it would be first outside Russia by militants from former Soviet republic (read @ link)
Luke Harding : The Guardian, Friday 19 April 2013 12.58 EDT

I knew the Miranda decsion was not about Carmen Miranda. Sometimes I have to throw some skittles out there on the blog for humor. If you Google Carmen Miranda you might see the photo with her wearing all that junk on her head.

The state is it’s own worst enemy. Refusing to be like Jesus is not saving the soul by supporting what Jesus would not support that jails people and kills people in the army. Have the state not be like Jesus is be suicidal like the devil is looking at who is the enemy of the state. That creates war to kill people that are in the state.